dp wants a pre-nup and i feel like shit

[lanaturnerssmile]

DP told me today “we need to sort out our finances with the solicitors”. He means some sort of pre-nup. Its 8 weeks to our wedding.
We have been together for 13 years and have 3 dc’s together.
He has £££ in assets after investing his money very well. He stands to make a lot of money if things continue as they are. I have a part-time job that pays peanuts (i dont need to work i chose to out of boredom when kids started school) after being a SAHM for years and have nothing to my name. We haven’t got married before now because he’s always said he doesn’t have the spare cash and he wants us to have a proper wedding. Also neither of us were that bothered, but then i started realising it was putting me in a very precarious situation should something happen to him.
Ive been so happy planning the wedding and now i just feel so deflated. i feel like he just wants to protect himself. i dont even know how much he has - how do i know he’ll tell the truth about his assets?
I said “what if i say im not signing anything?” and he said “we’ll get something drawn up and then discuss it”. I dont think he’ll marry me unless i sign something. Im completely ignorant when it comes to legal/financial matters and i dont want to sign something that seems like a good deal and then end up getting shafted (i would obvs have an independent solicitor to try and stop that happening).
For the record i love him very much and i know he loves me. We have a great relationship. Ive been feeling so smug though about how happy we are after being together so long, still really fancy one another and all that. Now i feel like my bubble has completely burst. I feel like its changed my opinion of him in a negative way. It feels so icky.
Anyone have any experience of this?

Icandothisallday

No, I am not the OP (kudos on the original line of argument, though ).

What I am saying is that what the OP has said is perfectly realistic, in my opinion, and adds up fine. You seem to have rather a suspicious turn of mind.

"There is nothing wrong with wanting your wedding to be special, and plenty of people put the day off until they can afford a meal and a DJ, with a few glasses of champagne, rather than insist on immediate marriage for legal and financial reasons"

There's not BUT it is still foolish - legally and financially - to not marry because of wanting a particular type of wedding AND making yourself vulnerable by having children and reducing hours/quitting work to be a sahm unless you are independently financed.

Prioritising a "nicer" wedding over long term financial and legal security is daft!

Unfortunately there's so many myths (several of which have been stated on this thread) about cohabiting that many (usually) women THINK they're protected by non existent "common law marriage laws" only to find they're royally screwed not only if they split but if the higher earning partner becomes critically ill or dies.

We see so many threads on here by women in extremely vulnerable positions being strung along by men who are happy to have all the benefits of a wife and full time mother to their children WITHOUT making any concessions themselves.

While it's good that there's less stigma around unmarried pregnancies now (although there IS still a stigma - to being a single mother too) the narrative that it's perfectly OK to cohabit, have children, quit work (even if only for a few years) has been really damaging not only to women but the children too.

I'd be very interested in how this has affected levels of child poverty.

Especially as child maintenance rules are so poorly enforced in this country and even IF you get cm enforced the amounts are usually way below a reasonable contribution to the costs of raising a child.

@ginghamtablecloths how has he shown his meanness when no one (including the OP) knows what he is suggesting to be in the pre nup.

Also, as I have said previously, the OP does not have to sign or agree to anything she doesn't want to.

A pre nup is not a document that is written by one person to be agreed or refused. A pre nup is a starting point for negotiations

I am also sure that if OP, brought assets into the relationship, her dp was a sahp and she wanted to ring fence pre relationship assets people alot of mn would think it was sensible

It would be reasonable to ring fence pre relationship. It is the ring fencing 13 years into the relationship when OP does not have much earning capacity due to being at home looking after their children so that he could work without any childcare responsibilities which is unreasonable.

swingofthings

I know plenty of people without a degree who have done well in life. Staying at home to raise children while your partner or husband goes out to work shouldn’t mean you end up impoverished if the relationship doesn’t work out. It’s a joint decision and the cost of it should be borne jointly. So says our legal system, anyway.

Graphista

No argument from me. To date, the OP has not been wise. Doesn’t mean she deserves to get screwed.

What I am saying is that what the OP has said is perfectly realistic, in my opinion, and adds up fine. You seem to have rather a suspicious turn of mind.

Or you are a bit naive, perhaps. Or even a bit biased.

It would be reasonable to ring fence pre relationship. It is the ring fencing 13 years into the relationship when OP does not have much earning capacity due to being at home looking after their children so that he could work without any childcare responsibilities which is unreasonable

The IP hasnr even seen the prenup. So she has no idea what would be in it. In fact he hasnr even said the words prenup at all.

And as for the ops earning potential. She is back in work. She could be working on that now, studying or doing a range of things. As an entirely seperate issue.

If she continues to stunt her own career prospects, that her decision to make. But it is a choice.

Icandothisallday

I’m certainly biased. Anybody trying this with me would be picking up bits of his teeth. But I am not naive.

Anybody trying this with me would be picking up bits of his teeth. But I am not naive.

Nice!

Except pp is seemingly happy enough with her dp, to still want to marry him. That suggests he isnt a cunt with money in general.

Which is why I am saying, I suspect there is more to this.

You are naive if you cant even contemplate that OP may also have an ulterior motive or be stretching the truth to make herself appear a victim in the situation.

I wonder if he has been scheming behind OP's back for some time and the papers are already drawn up.?
Someone said pre-nup might be thrown out anyway if both parties had not taken independent legal advice, so maybe OP should just hang fire , not consult a lawyer and sign just before the wedding if he insists, but would this be risky?

Icandothisallday

An ulterior motive like what? The motive seems pretty obvious.

Perhaps, she isnt happy with him.

Wants to leave him, but wants half of the pre relationship assets. So marrying with the intent to divorce. Several posters have suggested she do just that on this thread. I have seen it suggested on other threads too.

Or that she agrees to sign but purposely sabboages it so its nor binding. Forgetting and still may not, in divorce get anything he has accumulated before the marriage. She might but she might not. Which is why a prenup, may benefit her if assets and pensions accumulated during (but not before) the whole relationship are included.

Maybe she has decides she never wants to work full time again or quit work. But wants to be married then just quit without discussing it with him. I mean, what would he do if she did?

OP has jumped into assuming he means a prenup. He hasnt said a prenup or even mentioned terms of it. Which makes me think her entitlement to all his assets, is a driving force. Not just a romantic day.

I am not saying she is doing any of this. I am just saying it's a possibility.

"No argument from me. To date, the OP has not been wise. Doesn’t mean she deserves to get screwed." No it doesn't.

It's just so frustrating to read & hear of so many women who either don't realise "common law marriage" doesn't exist or who do know but think their partner "would never do that to me". So so much misinformation and naïveté about.

"Except pp is seemingly happy enough with her dp, to still want to marry him. That suggests he isnt a cunt with money in general." Not necessarily. All through this thread has had a distinct whiff of "financial abuse" about it.

Icandothisallday

Of course her entitlement to “his” assets (which I absolutely consider to be “their” assets) is the driving force. They have three children. She is a SAHM. Wanting to be financially secure is a perfectly natural, legitimate desire on her part.

I can see both sides here.

I think women who choose to have children pre-marriage are going to always be on a sticky wicket.

Good luck

Or, sorry, was a SAHM until recently and now works PT in a low income role. Of course she doesn’t want to sign a prenup.

And of course he does want to sign a prenup.

Ummm interesting , it may say in the declaration 'I confirm that I have taken legal advice....... ' OP needs to watch out, this guy is not stupid.

She isnt a sahm.

You may consider he pre relationship assets as joint. She may do. But they are, currently his assets and (if he even meant a pre nup) he may not. What you or I think of the assets, they are legally his.

Again who knows, he may have always been clear from the outset, that they will always be seperate. And OP was happy with that until now.

And what I meant is, the only driving force for the marriage was his assets.

Would you marry someone, even if you have been together a longtime if you suspected it was only for money

Again, my point is there is limited information and only one point of view. So lots of information missing. There could be situations where its perfectly reasonable to have a prenup. And forbhee to want one.

Again, I am suggesting alternatives to 'this man us a cunt screwing her over and a prenup will be bad for her'

There could be there are other things happening. And it could be good for her to sign.

If she refuses and it causes issues and the marriage is short. She wont get a cut of his pension, pre marriage for example.

It might be better for her to ensure all assets accumulated since they have been together are included. In case of short marriage.

It’s not just about the earning potential of the SAHP tho. It’s also about the ways in which the WOHP was able to increase their salary / assets due to the SAHP doing childcare, running the home etc.

I wouldn’t be able to get past the fact that he cares so little for me and his children that he would happily see us destitute potentially ( will of course be entirely for him what he ‘gives’ op)
What kind of man does this 8 weeks before the wedding?
I would sooner be penniless than marry him, what a calculating nasty bit of work. I wonder what other things he is not telling me too. How can there be any trust left? Let alone goodwill?
One might argue he has done this on purpose... so callous.

Cariadne yes, but as OP gives no information on this. Its possible these assets have increased regardless of her being at home.

Personally, as an aside from all this, I would suggest she improves her prospects now. If they split and he is a cunt, there could be all sorts of problems before a divorce is sorted.

MsSquiz I was referring to his meanness of spirit not in the literal sense.

I've seen many people say that they don't know what their partner or spouse earns and/or that their partner or spouse doesn't know what they earn or many things about their financial situation. There was a whole thing with Martin Lewis - after hearing many people say they've no idea about their household finances and struggle after their partner died or became very ill - encouraging people to discuss it more. Not discussing it isn't always nefarious, it's far more often just roles people fall into.

While I think it's reasonable to feel a bit off with how it's come up, especially if finances aren't usually discussed in such a way, I don't think it's automatically a bad thing even if the way he worded his fears were a bit naff. It would be a great opportunity for the OP to get greater information and involved with finances and come to an agreement on how to go forward together. I agree with the previous poster that fully discussing finances before marriage should be considered the norm, even when after 13 years of a very vulnerable situation.

Yeah, if it’s a short marriage she may not win the wedding lottery like she hopes. I wouldn’t advise any woman to quit work and live off a man. Always best to have your own income and self-respect. There is childcare out there.